I really don't get the wild hunt. So they were just elves? ok really good fighters and mages but just plain old elves? And all they did was look for ciri? What did gerald do with them when he was with them? He wouldn't really have participated in hunting her right? And they just took him in to attract ciri right? were we supposed to know that the wild hunt are just elves - I didn't but maybe I have forgotten or missed something? Did they exist before ciri was born, because it seemed they were this legendary ghost thing that people heard about in old stories. And also the white frost is kind of a "new" thread to their world so they wouldn't have had to hunt down other elder blood right? And why did the crones respect that one general so much, aren't they supposed to be very old and powerful, and he is just an elven mage/warrior and not really some mythical mighty creature is he? I'm confused, especially about what gerald did when "hunting" with them and what they do when not looking for ciri/elder blood
Yes, they're elves from another world ( they were in the witcher world and before that in another world but it's a long story) . The existed before Ciri, they were taking slave and stuff to their home world. The white frost is an old threat to their world, but they manage to slow it spreading. They need Ciri because she can open big enough portal to all elves and allow them to go to another world and conquer it. Yes, they were using Yen and after her Gerald as a bait for Ciri. Cronse respect them coz they can travel between world and great mages and warriors.
For me the story served its purpose but I agree with most here that it wasn't particularly inventive, especially because you can have your cake and eat it too at the end.
So while I could personally forgive the story, what bothered me was the lack of character development and resolution of Geralt. This is his end, as much as its Ciri's beginning of her life and the fact that the game's focus rested almost exclusively on her bothered me quite a lot. It's one of the reasons I've been posting in that huge Triss thread, because Geralt's romantic conundrum with her and Yen would've made a great catalyst to explore his thoughts not only on how he wants to end his life, but what he's willing to do and sacrifice for Ciri.
What if Ciri did have to give her life to stop the White Frost but Yen would never have allowed it? How would Triss react? What if you're in a position where you actually have to fight Yen to let Ciri go into the tower? Holy moley there could've been some seriously hardcore possibilities here.
But lets stick with what we have right now. In my case I got the Empress ending which left me extremely conflicted. The empire is a pretty big unknown and it's quite a leap of faith on Ciri's part to assume she would succeed at being the most powerful ruler of the world when there's still everyone around her trying to manipulate her. I didn't like the "don't worry about it and go with it" vibe of that ending and the fact that Geralt must have some absolutely serious issues with Ciri just leaving him like that.
Letting go of Ciri should've been something we got to explore with Geralt. Either as part of the epilogue or through dialogue before the final battle.
Bottom line for me is that this game needs more ways to show us how Geralt feels about the three important women in his life and how his journey to figure out what he is willing to accept colours the decisions he makes in his quest to save, empower and let go of Ciri. It's like we only really dealt with Ciri's journey, 50% of what needed to be told.
So while I could personally forgive the story, what bothered me was the lack of character development and resolution of Geralt. This is his end, as much as its Ciri's beginning of her life and the fact that the game's focus rested almost exclusively on her bothered me quite a lot. It's one of the reasons I've been posting in that huge Triss thread, because Geralt's romantic conundrum with her and Yen would've made a great catalyst to explore his thoughts not only on how he wants to end his life, but what he's willing to do and sacrifice for Ciri.
What if Ciri did have to give her life to stop the White Frost but Yen would never have allowed it? How would Triss react? What if you're in a position where you actually have to fight Yen to let Ciri go into the tower? Holy moley there could've been some seriously hardcore possibilities here.
But lets stick with what we have right now. In my case I got the Empress ending which left me extremely conflicted. The empire is a pretty big unknown and it's quite a leap of faith on Ciri's part to assume she would succeed at being the most powerful ruler of the world when there's still everyone around her trying to manipulate her. I didn't like the "don't worry about it and go with it" vibe of that ending and the fact that Geralt must have some absolutely serious issues with Ciri just leaving him like that.
Letting go of Ciri should've been something we got to explore with Geralt. Either as part of the epilogue or through dialogue before the final battle.
Bottom line for me is that this game needs more ways to show us how Geralt feels about the three important women in his life and how his journey to figure out what he is willing to accept colours the decisions he makes in his quest to save, empower and let go of Ciri. It's like we only really dealt with Ciri's journey, 50% of what needed to be told.
TW2 story was born out of CDPR's ability to freely explore the setting. TW3 seems to have been born out of the necessity to reintroduce certain characters into the spotlight. I think it's clear which approach produced a more cohesive piece of storytelling.
On top of that, it seems CDPR repeated the sins of of the father. The later portion of Ciri's arc in the books gradually detaches itself from the established setting , up to a point where reading about her feels like swapping in excerpts from a different book. The earthy tones give way to concepts more suited for high fantasy, and the results are... not pretty. I don't feel anything really changed between the books and games. The different hues did not mesh back then and they don't mesh now. It's hard to tell if anyone could really fix that. Perhaps the only way to avoid that problem is to avoid the Elder Blood entirely. God knows CDPR has a beast of a writing team, Bloody Baron is an everlasting testament to that. If the people responsible for that arc could not solve the puzzle, perhaps that well is truly poisoned beyond salvaging.
On top of that, it seems CDPR repeated the sins of of the father. The later portion of Ciri's arc in the books gradually detaches itself from the established setting , up to a point where reading about her feels like swapping in excerpts from a different book. The earthy tones give way to concepts more suited for high fantasy, and the results are... not pretty. I don't feel anything really changed between the books and games. The different hues did not mesh back then and they don't mesh now. It's hard to tell if anyone could really fix that. Perhaps the only way to avoid that problem is to avoid the Elder Blood entirely. God knows CDPR has a beast of a writing team, Bloody Baron is an everlasting testament to that. If the people responsible for that arc could not solve the puzzle, perhaps that well is truly poisoned beyond salvaging.
How was it in the books?
And are you saying that the whole Wild Hunt and Elder Blood arc was bad and didn't fit?
I would agree that the final act of TW3 was pretty bad, full of plotholes and deus ex machina's, overall just very rushed, didn't even feel like the same game
I liked the first act with the Baron questline too, probably the highlight of this game
Last edited:
It wasn't really bad, just... ill fitting.
Go outside. Grab some soil. Rub it between your fingers. Smell it. Taste it. That's Geralt and Zoltan and Yen and the kings and the sorcerers and the war and the woman with flowers in her hair, always a step behind the White Wolf.
Go back inside. Find some sugar. Taste it. Smell it. See how the crystals catch light. That's Ciri, the unicorns, the prophecies.
Some things just aren't meant to go together.
Go outside. Grab some soil. Rub it between your fingers. Smell it. Taste it. That's Geralt and Zoltan and Yen and the kings and the sorcerers and the war and the woman with flowers in her hair, always a step behind the White Wolf.
Go back inside. Find some sugar. Taste it. Smell it. See how the crystals catch light. That's Ciri, the unicorns, the prophecies.
Some things just aren't meant to go together.
100% on the mark. I found it eerie as well that the game fell apart from the same flaws that the book did. I think it is widely agreed upon that the final book in the novels is the worst one. It doesn't tonally match up with anything that came before it, and reads as if it belonged to a different author who was sharing characters. The novels are supposed to be medieval fantasy not an attempt at science fiction. As the novels turn more to prophecy and the White Frost, it loses the plot and becomes rather nonsensical and detached. It feels forced and shoe-horned in because the approach in the source material is equally unnatural. We go from castles, wars and plays of power into (mild spoilers) Space, time, alien elves, the mythology of Armageddon and the philosophical beginnings of life itself.
And as it happens, I didn't see any need whatsoever why the Witcher 3 had to honor or respect the source material in any way. At the end of the day, it is an artistic interpretation of existing material. It did not have to be canonically correct or matchup perfectly with the plot of the novels, because it wasn't all that great anyway. I agree, the best way to have dealt with the Elder Blood was to have ignored it entirely, not make the strangest part of the novel series the foundation of your final game! The Witcher world was a rather rich universe with a plot that was serviceable until it went off the deep end. Why bring it back with Witcher 3? Why not continue with the natural storytelling of its precursors which was not beholden to honoring or continuing novels that are not widely read? I think most of CDPR are big fans of Sapkowski's work and this is seen evidently in all the pointless name-drops and brief unnecessary character cameos. It is a nice tribute, but if the author doesn't appreciate it, and it's no good, is it worth it indulging the fandom? Most of the fans of the novel seem to think so, but I whole-heartedly disagree.
Really? I don't agree with anything you just said. The final book is the best in my opinion. And the prophecy and White Frost did not come out of left field exactly. The prophecy is the first you read in Blood of Elves, before the first chapter. The whole saga is basically about Ciri and her Elder Blood, which of course ties in to the prophecy. So, I don't know what you're referring at. The final book does a good job in tying everything together, while maintaining some mystery and openness. And I wouldn't call it science fiction just because Ciri can travel to other worlds. This is not at all strange to fantasy.
Good comparison and I agree but you would basically need to change the whole overall plot of the games (Wild Hunt have been appearing since TW1, basically everything happened because of them, amnesia etc. and I assume for the books too)
I'm not sure how that would work out
---------- Updated at 01:17 AM ----------
They brought it back because otherwise you would need to change the whole plot of the games
I mean we had to deal with the Wild hunt eventually, they are responsible for everything that happened to Geralt (Amnesia, kidnapping Yennefer, making him a rider of the Hunt etc.)
I'm curious to know how you would change that?
Last edited:
It probably wouldn't. Isn't it such a sweet piece of the irony cake that decisions made nearly a decade ago come to roost just now? Life imitating art. Oscar Wilde would be proud.
Okay, let me preface this with a huge spoiler warning for the novels.
Without making a many-paged essay out of this, I disagree. The focus and the charm of the Witcher novels has always been in my opinion, the personal trials faced by Geralt, Yennefer and Ciri, not any real tangible threat such as climate change, armies and demons. Geralt has to try and reconcile the fact that his longstanding philosophy of neutrality and commitment to being a witcher, the only identity he ever knows, is constantly compromised and superseded because he begins to care for something beyond himself. Ciri struggles with the age-old coming of age difficulties and wrestling between the personal freedom and adventure with the ever increasing responsibilities and importance she holds for the rest of the world. And Yennefer's trial is to love, not out of lust or convenience but out of such pure intentions she would die for it. She has to learn to care for something so much that she would throw away her vanity and her life. These are all core themes of the novels, and none of them have anything to do with the Prophecy of the White Chill and the White Light, or alien elves or the conjunction of spheres. These are backdrops, not the focus. But in the final novel it is all brought to the forefront as if the payoff is itself discovering what the Swallow means and what the Elder Blood implies. It doesn't matter! And the whole point of the novels is led to be that it doesn't matter because it doesn't matter to the main characters. Ciri rejects this responsibility time and time again, and decides independently that she will live for herself and not in servitude of the responsibilities of her birth. These are heavy-handed attempts at clever science-fiction tropes. "What if we are strangers in our own world? What if there are alternate worlds besides our own and that every story is tied into the same universe? What if the fictional story you are reading is in fact part of the reality you are living? What if future salvation lies in the past? How do we sever the Ouroboros?" Now don't get me wrong, these are all great questions and great themes that are tackled by the final novel, but they simply have no place. The pacing gets all screwed up the tone gets completely shifted on its head and significantly moves away from the pathos and the setting of the four previous novels.
So no I don't think the final Arc of Ciri's story was especially well done in the novels. And it was poorly executed in the game as well.
This is a wonderful analysis. I agree with all of this. Very well said.
Yes, perhaps they are backdrops, but important backdrops that regulate the story. But what I reacted on in my previous post was that you made it sound like all this came out of nowhere. Which, it didn't. From the beginning we get to know about the prophecy and the Elder Blood, and it's only natural story progression that we get to learn more about it as the saga moves on. Blood of Elves is almost completely about Ciri's powers, which come from the Elder Blood, so we know right from the start that the Elder Blood is important. Ciri's Elder Blood is basically the root cause of everything that happens in the story, it is because of the Elder Blood she is hunted. So, to me, finding out more about the Elder Blood in the final book is rewarding.
I can't really agree with the OPs sentiment, my primary problem with the second game which seems to the "fan favorite" of the three is its focus on the political side of things. In all honesty I really didn't care about any of the politics in 2, every time they did I just nodded me head, groaned and thought to myself "Horay, more discussing about the potential future of places I've never seen, know exactly fuck and all about and care even less for."
While you could probably make a pretty objectively good argument that the politics of 2 are loads better than 3, which they most certainly are imo 3s stuff with Geralt and Ciri pretty much drops kicks 2s politics down a flight of stairs. For the first time Geralt felt like he had some personality to him, for the first time I actually liked Zoltan and Dandelion, guys like Eskel, Lambert, Keira, Vesemir and especially Ciri all clicked for me wwaayyy more than anyone in 2 ever did.
I didn't care about Iorveth or Mister Patrotism (Roche) or his side kicks Tits (Ves) and really the only guy in the entire game that was appealing at all to me was Letho. Here, the main bad guy was the weakest of them all character wise but everyone else became infinitely better and more interesting.
While you could probably make a pretty objectively good argument that the politics of 2 are loads better than 3, which they most certainly are imo 3s stuff with Geralt and Ciri pretty much drops kicks 2s politics down a flight of stairs. For the first time Geralt felt like he had some personality to him, for the first time I actually liked Zoltan and Dandelion, guys like Eskel, Lambert, Keira, Vesemir and especially Ciri all clicked for me wwaayyy more than anyone in 2 ever did.
I didn't care about Iorveth or Mister Patrotism (Roche) or his side kicks Tits (Ves) and really the only guy in the entire game that was appealing at all to me was Letho. Here, the main bad guy was the weakest of them all character wise but everyone else became infinitely better and more interesting.
The Witcher 3 story was so good, when i finished, i was feeling like a train passed over me, i walked a half hour in my house, waiting the empty feeling to pass, i didn't feel nothing like that after playing witcher 1 and 2. Ciri was so lovely, Priscilla. Skellig part for me was so epic. Only the ending was shocking because the lack of content, but we never want to say goodbbye.
Whether or not Witcher 3 is a good sequel is an entirely different conversation from whether or not Witcher 3 has a good story. My criticism is of the latter. If the Witcher 3 had dropped all the political subtext and all the characters from the 2nd game, that would have been fine, so long as they delivered a story which matched the maturity and pacing of the 2nd. That didn't happen. You may have enjoyed and empathized with certain characters in Witcher 3 over Assassin's of Kings, but are you really going to say that Witcher 3's story was anywhere close to Witcher 2? I have a young nephew in middle school who could have written something better.
I'd say that the Witcher 2 is, as of now, a better overall story. It's tighter, far better paced and more intelligently complex. I found the choices harder, was more amazed by the different outcomes and was just generally more taken by the political thriller plot of 2 than the end of the world evil invaders plot of 3.
I have, I think, 3 major issues with Wild Hunt;
Firstly the final Act is a simply a mess. it's rushed and all over the place in quality. They clearly ran out of time and it needs some serious work. Reasons of State especially needs some work.
Secondly the Antagonists, the Wild Hunt, were very underdeveloped. We never learn that much about them. Never come to feel much about them. Eredin's motives and personality are hardly explored making for a very underwhelming climactic battle. Then there's the White Frost which I think was mentioned in a total of 3 notes, a handful of conversations and seen for about 5 minutes in a frozen world. I don't recall hearing about it a single time before the last 10 or so hours of the game and even then it was hardly touched upon. The weakness of both antagonistic forces leads to a very underwhelming climax. I can't say I felt much of anything when Ciri went through the portal as I had no idea what she was actually going to do and fighting Eredin was rather uneventful as I felt nothing towards him. No anger, no fear, no pity. He was just another guy in armor I had to beat.
Finally for a story that was supposed to be a personal journey for Geralt it rarely gets that personal. I wanted to get into Geralt's head to see what he thinks about his amnesia now that he has his memories back, to see how he veiws of his relationship with Yen and Triss. More downtime with his friends would have been welcome as they are generally the ones that pick his brains to draw out thoughts and opinions but we never have that many discussions with people like Zoltan and Dandelion. Never really get to sit down over a pint of ale and reminisce. There's a great piss up scene between Geralt, Lambert and Eskle and that's the exact kind of thing I'm talking about. We needed more of that and other simply social interaction. This was after all supposed to be a personal journey.
I have, I think, 3 major issues with Wild Hunt;
Firstly the final Act is a simply a mess. it's rushed and all over the place in quality. They clearly ran out of time and it needs some serious work. Reasons of State especially needs some work.
Secondly the Antagonists, the Wild Hunt, were very underdeveloped. We never learn that much about them. Never come to feel much about them. Eredin's motives and personality are hardly explored making for a very underwhelming climactic battle. Then there's the White Frost which I think was mentioned in a total of 3 notes, a handful of conversations and seen for about 5 minutes in a frozen world. I don't recall hearing about it a single time before the last 10 or so hours of the game and even then it was hardly touched upon. The weakness of both antagonistic forces leads to a very underwhelming climax. I can't say I felt much of anything when Ciri went through the portal as I had no idea what she was actually going to do and fighting Eredin was rather uneventful as I felt nothing towards him. No anger, no fear, no pity. He was just another guy in armor I had to beat.
Finally for a story that was supposed to be a personal journey for Geralt it rarely gets that personal. I wanted to get into Geralt's head to see what he thinks about his amnesia now that he has his memories back, to see how he veiws of his relationship with Yen and Triss. More downtime with his friends would have been welcome as they are generally the ones that pick his brains to draw out thoughts and opinions but we never have that many discussions with people like Zoltan and Dandelion. Never really get to sit down over a pint of ale and reminisce. There's a great piss up scene between Geralt, Lambert and Eskle and that's the exact kind of thing I'm talking about. We needed more of that and other simply social interaction. This was after all supposed to be a personal journey.
I really hope that CDPR puts out some DLCs that expand more on the main story and the Wild Hunt. In TW2 they added a bunch of content in order to make Act III longer and more fleshed out. Mass Effect 3 changed the endings. I don't see why it would be so bad if CDPR would add more content to flesh out the main story. Not exactly change it, but just give people more information.
I'm not done with the game, but I feel like we hear about the Wild Hunt a few times at the beginning of the game, and then it kind of disappears into the background until I'm guessing near the end of the game. I wish it was more of a constant threat throughout the entire game.
I'm not done with the game, but I feel like we hear about the Wild Hunt a few times at the beginning of the game, and then it kind of disappears into the background until I'm guessing near the end of the game. I wish it was more of a constant threat throughout the entire game.
I would say its better yes. Because 3 actually managed to engage me in what was happening. Made me care about the people and world it was happening in. Nothing in Witcher 2s story did this at all.The racism was painfully over the top to the point where I was a-okay with Nilfgaards much feared invasion coming just so these racist pricks AKA EVERYONE IN THE GAME can die either on the battlefield or during their regime. The much praised politics constantly dealt with countries and forces you never seen or really get to know on any level to care about which further exacerbated the issue of everyone in North being some variation of a racist asshole.
Honestly the Baron storyline alone was far more fulfilling, interesting and yes, better written than anything I found in 2. If there's one place where 2 trumps 3 in terms of storytelling its the main antagonist. Letho was basically the only time all the scheming and plotting became interesting plus his motivation for starting this chain of events felt pretty sympathetic and dealt with an issue no one brings up in the Witcher world: if all schools of the Witcher profession are dying, why is no one doing anything about it?
By comparison the Wild Hunt had no real personality, a vague motivation and it just felt weird the entire game was subtitled with them. I also really didn't care for them being elves from another dimension, yeah I know the books already made this canon but I vastly preferred them as this army of wraiths who heralded death and destruction and the end times. Hell, making them the instigators of the White Frost probably would've worked better.
I absolutely adore how the main story was set and developed, but endings are really abrupt. I mean, we don't even know what will be happened with other sorceresses, except Keira.
The worst one is a Ciri-Witcher/Nilfgaard win ending, because of horrible logical flaws in that. How do they hope to trick Emhyr with such dull lie in long term? And after that it gets even more stupid: Ciri becomes a famous witcher in the North - oh, Emhyr probably won't guess who is that ashen-haired witcher girl.
The worst one is a Ciri-Witcher/Nilfgaard win ending, because of horrible logical flaws in that. How do they hope to trick Emhyr with such dull lie in long term? And after that it gets even more stupid: Ciri becomes a famous witcher in the North - oh, Emhyr probably won't guess who is that ashen-haired witcher girl.
I agree with a lot of what you say. Even though I enjoyed the story and game over all there were many elements I thought were out of place or just poorly implemented. All the name dropping you mentioned is something that bothered me quite a bit, the sorceresses do what exactly? A lot of time is spent in the final act to talk about the lodge and its role, not only in fighting the hunt, but also in the political scheming that would follow. The whole mission with Phillipa is a good example of an interesting set up that leads nowhere. She talks to you about wanting to replace Yen and that you should convince her to leave, yet this is never mentioned later or actually leads anywhere or contributes anything to the development of the story. And the whole Triss thing is already covered in an almost 2000 post thread, so I see no reason to go into that anymore than to mention I agree with most of it.
The things that bothered me most however were Eredin and how he and the hunt was handled, and the stupid wolf blizzard thing at the end. The blizzard is something that has been mentioned many times in all the games but it has always been something distant, not something directly affecting the plot. That being said I wouldn't have objected to Ciri wanting to stop it as the main plot, just they way it was implemented. "BTW, I have to go fight this snowstorm now, because YOLO". Ciri always struck me as a person who strives to do the right thing and would be willing to sacrifice her life to save Eredin's world, if it was allowed to happen on her terms. This would have opened a whole new way of solving the conflict with the hunt. CDPR also promised many different endings, I always imagined that meant something similar to act to in witcher 2, where the games final "levels" would be different depending on your choice, and not just some stupid slides at the end, although they are better than nothing.
On an unrelated note, the elf witch lady Ida, or whatever her name was said that Geralt would decide weather or not to start the blizzard or some other shit, I don't remember exactly. But he didn't, Ciri did, you have no influence over it what so ever, that annoyed me.
The things that bothered me most however were Eredin and how he and the hunt was handled, and the stupid wolf blizzard thing at the end. The blizzard is something that has been mentioned many times in all the games but it has always been something distant, not something directly affecting the plot. That being said I wouldn't have objected to Ciri wanting to stop it as the main plot, just they way it was implemented. "BTW, I have to go fight this snowstorm now, because YOLO". Ciri always struck me as a person who strives to do the right thing and would be willing to sacrifice her life to save Eredin's world, if it was allowed to happen on her terms. This would have opened a whole new way of solving the conflict with the hunt. CDPR also promised many different endings, I always imagined that meant something similar to act to in witcher 2, where the games final "levels" would be different depending on your choice, and not just some stupid slides at the end, although they are better than nothing.
On an unrelated note, the elf witch lady Ida, or whatever her name was said that Geralt would decide weather or not to start the blizzard or some other shit, I don't remember exactly. But he didn't, Ciri did, you have no influence over it what so ever, that annoyed me.